Talk:FlashGet

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Spyware? Certainly

Isn't FlashGet spyware? -- Toytoy 11:00, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

I'm sure that FlashGet is partly malware because Avast! detected the FlashGet toolbar used in Internet Explorer as adware. --Bruin_rrss23 (talk) 09:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

way to bump dead conversations --1698 06:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What they said "Optional" adware. I have never seen anything overthere about this option. Moreover, Lavasoft's adaware always detect it as a piece of malware.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.135.12.112 (talk) 05:47, 28 July 2006

Okay, I just installed the latest version and there's nothing optional about the 3 IE Add-in's the program installs. The wiki article is somewhat mislead in this regard, and I would not have installed this software if I knew it would automatically, without asking, install add-ins. Urbanriot 21:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ethic.. crack link !?

Is it okay to link to a site that distributes crack/serial information? 2—Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.202.172.138 (talk) 23:08, 23 April 2005

Of course it is NOT okay. --Anthony Ivanoff 15:08, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

advertisments

isn't it wrong to show a way to get rid of ads without paying a shareware software?It is not much different from giving crack method to get rid of ads

I've removed the "how to remove advertisements" section; it is unencyclopedic. [1] —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-15 03:22Z

Articles for Deletion debate

This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Splash^talk 23:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

not very encyclopedic...

Is it really "encyclopedic" to write sections about how to remove a piece of software, whatever it is? External links would've been more appropriated Omega Said 20:30, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like Flashget is now Freeware. is it?

Version 1.72 (2006.5) whatsnew quote: "* All free !!! * Context menu add to Opera 8.x"

I am not 100% sure if it has gone free. The licence.txt file (found after installation) is dated back in 29/7/2005, and still states "The SOFTWARE isn't free". I did a clean uninstall, and installed the new version, then in the About box says "this copy is licenced to <my windows username>". I did not see any banners, and registration nags (forwarded my clock some years to the future :) ) Randomgrk 20:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

its really always been freeware... they just used to try to get some money from ppl who didnt know anything about software... they probably took it out cuz ppl complained --1698 19:39, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

screenshot

its a gif

whoever was brave (or stupid) enough to install this should retake it in png--Froth 01:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Cynical 22:01, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of the screenshot, it should be updated to show off its new look. (Zero3K)

I've uploaded a newer screenshot. Matt489 Talk 03:02, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

about last revert

the older versions of flashget is not more ad free the the current one, and the references was duplicate so i removed it. --1698 15:43, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

flashget website unavalible

There is a weird problem i cant access flashget website as of 29/12/2006, i am not sure when this as started but does anyone else experience this issue or know something about it?--88.153.65.18 16:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to access the website just now and it works. As of accessing the website yesterday, I don't know (since I switched over to Free Download Manager). You might have been affected by the international link failure in Taiwan or the website was taken down for maintenance... I don't know.--Bruin_rrss23 (talk) 07:24, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

well i think it is the link failure since i tryed pinging it and i just get the packets lost, so that means that the website isnt blocked but has connection trouble, well if you know a place where i can get updates on the link failure repair status then thanks (p.s: my ip changed because i restarted my router)--88.153.48.205 12:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the ip adress has to be origional.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Aladden (talk • contribs) 14:17, 30 December 2006

Mystery connections possible spyware

I can see in my firewall (comodo firewall 2.4) that flashget is connecting the internet even when its not active to various strange ip addresses can someone please use something like wireshark and analyze what is behing sent from this connection. --88.154.136.53 02:46, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recent discussion about this on the FlashGet forums: http://bbs.flashget.com/viewthread.php?tid=8723&pid=30526&page=1&extra=page%3D1#pid30526 Cdean 17:26, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"FlashGet 1.7.x are better than newer versions..."

On 8 December 2007 200.120.100.48 added the comment "FlashGet 1.7.x are better than newer versions 1.8.x or 1.9.x as they have a lot of bugs and the downloads probably stop at 99%." Aside from being ungrammatical, I think the comment is untrue. I downloaded and used the latest version of FlashGet a week or so ago with no problems. So I'm going to revert (remove) 200.120.100.48's insertion.

200.120.100.48, if you disagree with this action, please explain here. NCdave (talk) 02:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This section appears to be endorsing the product as if affiliated to the company: "Take a note, FlashGets "adware" and "spyware" is both harmless and safe to use. AdWare frame could be easily disable in the View options of the program (view-(uncheck) Enable Recommend page)"

Is ths true? Is it still appropriate for this section to be in this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.179.173.178 (talk) 01:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: multiple downloads

I run a web server and have had repeated incidents whereby FlashGet-using clients have accidentally downloaded the same file multiple times: today one chap downloaded the same file 5,089 times (transferring 1.7TB before I noticed). I have a hard time believing I'm the only afflicted by this, and thus am wondering if there is other discussions/validation of potentially bugginess on the part of FlashGet that should be added to the article. 15:14, 24 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zachdms (talk • contribs)

Versioning

While article states that the most recent stable version is 2.3, the official site itself is very unclear about it.

Quick “Download” link on the title page offers the last “pre-2.x” version (1.9.6).
“Downloads” page leads to either the last “pre-2.x” or the last “classic” version (1.7.3).
Only a side-banner on the title page advertises 2.0 (sic!), and the links to files are provided inside forum topic.

So it looks like if you want to get the latest 2.x version, you have to, at first, know of its existence, and, at second, to scroll through the mentioned forum topic, which already counts 32 pages of 10 messages each. I took a glance on some pages from the start and the end of this topic and was unsuccessful with finding any useful information, except massive unmoderated spam messages and off-topic discussions. Moreover, no official posting proves the existence of version 2.3 or alike.

But when I visited chinese version of official site, it had a big “Quick download” link for 3.0 and a side-banner for 2.4. Well, I remember some postings in the before-mentioned topic where users complained about being unable to “translate chinese FlashGet” and asked about where to get localization pack.

Maybe this is it: FlashGet is currently developed in Chinese primarily, and there are no official localized releases newer than 2.0. I think, this needs thorough clarification in the article by people who are familiar with the subject. 217.172.21.161 (talk) 05:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]